November 2017 Newsletter from Srivatsa Ramaswami--माया māyā (Illusion)
I am planning to go to India end November and stay there for about 4 months. I am scheduled to teach two programs at Yoga Vahini in Chennai-- a 20 hr Samkhyakarika program in January 2018 and a 100 hr Advanced Vinyasakrama TT program in Vinyasakrama Yoga in February. Then a 50 hr ten day program on Bhagavatgita at Omyoga in New Delhi in March 2018 . Then the same Bhagavatgita in Hyderabad, @ Yogavahini (March 20 to 29th yoagavahini@gmail.com 9948312492) You may get the details of the programs in my website www.vinyasakrama.com/Events
I am also likely to do a few other programs in 2018, . I may teach a weekend workshop in Germany in May, a week long programs in Austin TX in June, a week long program on the twin subjects of Samkhyakarika and yogasutras at Loyola Marymount University ( July 28 to August 4), Yogayagnyavalkya a weekend program in Chicago in September and possibly a week long Core vinyasakrama yoga program at Yogakanda, Santiago in Chile in October 2018 (contacto@yogakanda.com). Once the details are confirmed I will have them listed in the Events page of my website.
माया māyā (Illusion)
Disciple: Guruji. I have been hearing that there are a few philosophers who say that the universes is not real but only an illusion.
Guruji: Yes they do
D: How can they say that this universe of bricks and mortar and me made of bones and muscles is an illusion?
G: Are you sure that what you see and feel is real.
D: Most certainly, it is obvious. Can there be any doubt?
G: Those philosophers are sure that the universe is merely an illusion just as you are sure that it is all real.
D: How can this be an illusion? It is real, can't they see that it is all real. Won't they feel the pain if hurt?
G: Just as we see they also see this universe, still they assert that it can only be an illusion. They are reasonable thinkers,truth seekers and sincere people: that is why they are called rishis. Since they also have the same experience as we have but still come to a different conclusion we must spare some time to find out why they say so--try to find what they see that we do not seem to see.
D: What is the Sanskrit word for this illusion we are talking about?
G: There are a few but the most well known one is माया māyā
D; I find that this word is interpreted differently
G: True. It could be different due to the context but it could also depend upon how the word is broken down, analyzed. Usually this samasa (compound word) is split (vigraha) into mA plus yA. Let us restrict the interpretation to the present context which is about the universe. It is "yA mA sA mAya". It is easy to find the meaning of the word 'yA' and it would mean 'the one' in feminine gender.
D: Why feminine gender?
G: It is a peculiarity with Sanskrit . All nouns are masculine, feminine or neuter gender. One reason why the word yA is used is because it is associated with creation.. mother
D: Oh
GL Let us get to the part 'mA' now.
D: 'Yes I see now, 'mA' is mother in many Indian languages and maybe an abbreviation of maatru or mother.
G: Yes one interpretation of the word is mother, here the creatrix or universal mother, She is goddess, sakti one main form of worship, it is one of the six mathas. The word mAyA then would be the one who is the universal mother. MayA, prakriti are used to describle the creative power.
D:Yes we find mAyA a popular name given to girls. Gautama Buddha's mother's name is said to be mAyA. So Maya is the universal sakti or power of creation. But coming to our discussion how does Maya mean illusion?
G: There is another interpretation of the word mA. mA is measure or to measure. In the context of vedanta the created universe is that which is measured or limited or the one that is limited (mA). It should be so understood in the context of vedanta. In vedanta the source of the universe is Brahman which is consciousness unlimited (ananta). In comparison to it the created universe or prakriti is limited. In fact the purusha sukta, a vivid vedic description of creation from the purusha or brahman, the purusha is said to extend beyond the universe by ten digits indicating that the brahman is unlimited and unbounded whereas the created prakriti is limited. There are references to this in a number of vedic and puranic narrations of creation. The created universe is one part or amsa of the Supreme. Even according to scientists the universe in unbounded but limited-it is limited to an immensely dense singularity maybe the size of a dime in its origin. The Samkhyas also appear to suggest the prakriti is atomic in its mula or root stage.
D: So mAyA would represent the mammoth creation but finite. Or mAyA would mean the finite one in the context of the source Brahman which is infinite.
G: Now the other interpretation of 'mA'. It is 'not' or an injunction 'do not' or don't
D: Then it also means who is not, am I right?
G: First let us take the interpretation of 'do not'. Lord Krishna in the Gita tells Arjuna 'mA sochi (sucha) meaning do not worry. MAyA would mean something that one, the spiritual aspirant is advised not to get involved. Why so? Because it is full of duhkha or pain and sorrow or because it repeatedly enslaves one birth after birth with incessant karmas. This is the main theme of samkhya, yoga and vedanta and a few other Eastern philosophies. They all say that the the outside universe is productive of predominantly duhkha, of course sugar quoted with some pleasures which all creatures love and thus captivated and enslaved. Because it is full of duhkha and makes one do karmas both good and bad the consequences of which are repeated duhkha dominated universe in which one takes repeated birhts. So Patanjali says "This repeated misery-- birth after birth-- should be ended (heyam duhkham anagatam)". Fully agree the Samkhyas and vedantins. renunciates, yogis, sanyasins, vivekis bairagis who lead a completely detached life.
D; So you say Maya could indicate that which should be renounced? Yes Maya binds everyone offering some little pleasure for a disproportionate amount of pain and sorrow.
G: Then we have mA meaning 'not' or 'not really existing' whereby we get the interpretation that mAyA is illusion. So mAyA would mean that which does not (really) exist, though it may appear to exist.
D: Who are the scholars that say that the universe is but an illusion or mAyA
G; The most well known of this group are the vednatins who subscribe to the theory of advaita. Other non advaitic vedantins even as they agree that Brahman is the source of everything, that Brahman is 'sat' or real, also imply that the creation also is real, this would be sat vada and satkarya vada. It would mean that the source of the universe Brahman is the reality and then the creation also is a real activity. There are of course a few other non vedic philosophies which imply that the creation is not really real even as they do not subscribe to a real source as Brahman
D: What reasoning these mayavadins put forward to substantiate the assertion that it is all an illusion?
G: Several arguments-- many examples like the rope and snake and others. But one has to reason out step by step.
D: Can we go through the steps you consider helpful?
G: We have done this up to a point in some of our earlier discussions. Ok let us start. First answer the question about how you are able to experience the universe around you. How does science explain this?
D: We experience the outside world through our senses, even though the senses do not directly experience the objects. They are experienced through sight, hearing, taste smell and the touch. According to science these sensations are transmitted by the sense organs like eyes ears etc., to different parts of the brain where they are processed, collated analyzed, compared, emotions added and finally the picture is seen by the brain in the brain. They emphasize that the eyes do not see but only the brain sees.
G. But the universe also consists of you, the subject
D: Some scientists also indicate that there is the awareness of one's own body through the nervous system, the afferent nerves. The impulses sent to the brain by the network of nerves are also felt by the brain. Thus we have a composite picture of what we experience-- the outside world and the subject also as part of the universe. The total experience consists of “I seeing the universe”
G: Ok let us say the brain sees everything. But the brain space is limited but what we see is in front of us, say, like you sitting in front of me outside the brain even as all are within the brain space. Further in the brain the information as processed is in the form of neurons floating around the brain. The whole information may have to be reconverted into some form like what we see.
D I see
G: So the brain after the complete processing in a split second will have to project the whole information exactly as we see, as we experience. And that projection even as it can be assumed to take place in the brain space has to take place in virtual space.
D; Ok like the dream experience taking place in our head during dream state.
G: Now this raises two conclusions. One is that what we see are only the projections of the mind even if we admit that the outside world is real.
D: So the brain receives information as impulses through the senses then projects them in the virtual space. We see only the projection and not the object per say.
G: Yes without the brain recreating what is received through the senses it is not possible to explain how the objects are seen because the brain cells and neurons are not what is seen. The brain itself receives the information through the senses only as electrical impulses.
D: So according to science it amounts to saying that the brain projects the processed information in the virtual/mental space and it also sees what it projects.
G: But then we have a couple of issues with this. One is, if the brain projects what one sees it will amount to saying that since the brain projects also the subject that experiences the outside world, it would imply this.-- that the brain projects itself because the brain is part of the subject. Can the brain project itself and also see that. Then the question the brain the subject has, what is it, is it the organ brain or the projection? It also has another question to answer: can the brain project itself and also see
D: It also raises another question if the brain has got consciousness which is awareness as we experience is not changing, it is unwavering and experiences everything that we experience everything the brain itself is said to process and project.
G: Also the brain is made of matter, just organic matter created from the food matter taken from the outside world. How does the non-conscious matter produce a non changing consciousness. So we could say that that the view held by science that brain is the one that experiences and also is the one which processes and projects the information received through the senses may not be conclusive.
D So what does it mean I am confused
G: It amounts to saying that we do not see the objects of the outside world and can see only the projection a virtual image in virtual space. The view that the brain processes and projects the sensations received and also sees is not really convincing, tenable. So the first conclusion we can make is that one can not ascertain that the outside universe really exists which is the default belief because what we experience can only be virtual. So many philosophers conclude that one cannot prove that the universe exists, and say it is anirvacaniya or indeterminate.
D: Can we say that it is just an illusion? It appears that it is equally difficult to prove that the universe is real.
G: We have to determine two things here. Since we see the universe of which the physical observer the subject also is a part, is just a projection which is all one can say. It is not the result of real objects that are processed and then reprojected as we have just seen. They can only be objectless projections which can be considered or called as an illusion . There is no creation but only a projection.
D: Yes since according to this line of approach, my world that includes me- your disciple -that I perceive is only a projection. And the brain is not the projector of this world I see because since the brain also is a part of the universe it can not project itself.. Further my brain is not the observer. It is funny, that the common belief that the brain experiences and acts itself is an illusion. Looks as though it is difficult to prove that the world is real. In that case from where this world of mine that I experience--even if it is an illusion-- comes and also who is the observer, because the brain can not see, it has no consciousness.
G: Even among those who view that the individual world is but an illusion, an appearance, differ in their answers to your question. According to a well known Indian philosophy very popular in South East Asia, this question is irrelevant. Once you know the whole thing is but an appearance, there is no purpose served in trying to find more answers using the brain. It is known now that it is but an illusion and that it is also full of misery. The only thing one has to do is to overcome this miserable illusion by proper meditation and remove all thoughts the absence of which will remove all pain and sorrow for ever. The search for the self, the observer, subject or whatever is irrelevant, unnecessary or even counterproductive they would advice.
D: It is tough
G: The other view that can be gleaned from the Bhagavat gita is also interesting. Krishna says inter alia, that He or God (Maayin) created the universe by the power of his Maya. Maya now can be considered as real but limited creation as we have considered earlier or it can be considered as an illusion. In fact the Lord is called a Mayavi which expression is usually associated with a magician. This will amount to saying that the Lord created the universe but it is just an illusion not material. Again the subject is the Lord/Brahman Himself which is pure unvarying consciousness who indwells in every body as the atman observing the illusion of each one individually. Ofcourse one should understand the nature of the self, the Lord and the nature of Maya and attain salvation.
D: Are there other views which indicate the universe is not as real as we commonly believe
G; There is another religion/philosophy which implies that God created the universe as succession of momentary impulses. Every moment He creates this universe anew-it is continuous creation-- and the individual creatures are caught up in this mammoth illusion. He is the beacon light to get out of this enslaving creation.
D: Thank you.
G: Think about this line of discussion and understand the texts like the Gita the upanishads and the advaita literature of sankara and others to know more about this mAyA. They all aver that our default understanding of the universe and our own selves are defective.
D: It is not difficult to understand why the mayavadins assert that it is all an illusion or mAyA, but it is yet another to 'feel' that it is so. The sages like Suka, son of Vyasa is believed to have remained completely oblivious to the surroundings and his own body in a state of sahaja samadhi. Gaudapada says to the effect that nobody is ever born really(na kascit jayate jivaha) or anything is ever created really. All creatures are just organic robots activated by their karma/samskaras, like the dream self that runs around with a illusory body and appears to think with a non existing mind. All creatures appear confused about the universe and about themselves life after life.
G: Yes
D: What about Advaita which is associated with Mayavada or the theory of Illusion?
G: It is of the vedantic school. In vedanta the source is Brahman which is unwavering consciousness. This can be immediately identified as the individual consciousness in the subject. In us the body- brain complex, there is consciousness, distinct and uncarying. The vedantins observe that this body/ mind that constantly changes is known due to the consciousness that as we have seen is independent and not part of the brain that is organic matter and is for ever changing. The consciousness in us is ever aware of whatever that goes on as a cittavritti during our childhood then adulthood then old age and according to Lord Krishana into the future lives. It is the same consciousness that is aware of the experiences during waking, dream and deep sleep stages and remains unaffected even in the yogic state of kaivalya or turiya. So all that is experienced is in this atomic brahman whose essence is pure consciousness unaffected by time or space. Everything that is experienced takes place within it ( so is unaffected by space) as a mayavritti or an illusion but appears without it and appears real. That is why in the initial stages one meditates within oneself to locate the atman. So the whole, ever changing experience I have is my world which is an illusion stream is taking place within me within the consciousness Brahman/Atman
D: One more question. Even to experience an illusion one needs eyes and ears, like watching a magic show
G: Not necessarily. Take the case of your dream experience. Dream is an illusion that appears to take place within you. At that time according to science, most motor activities are paralyzed, you forget yourself. Dream experience takes place without the senses coming into play. The dream self sees illusory dream objects with illusory senses and thinks with a brain which is an illusion. Similarly the whole life experience takes place within the Self, the non changing pure consciousness
D: So Brahman the source of my illusory world is the consciousness that should be called as I
G: Yes . Ok be calm, study the texts, think deeply,internalize and clear all doubts.
I am planning to go to India end November and stay there for about 4 months. I am scheduled to teach two programs at Yoga Vahini in Chennai-- a 20 hr Samkhyakarika program in January 2018 and a 100 hr Advanced Vinyasakrama TT program in Vinyasakrama Yoga in February. Then a 50 hr ten day program on Bhagavatgita at Omyoga in New Delhi in March 2018 . Then the same Bhagavatgita in Hyderabad, @ Yogavahini (March 20 to 29th yoagavahini@gmail.com 9948312492) You may get the details of the programs in my website www.vinyasakrama.com/Events
I am also likely to do a few other programs in 2018, . I may teach a weekend workshop in Germany in May, a week long programs in Austin TX in June, a week long program on the twin subjects of Samkhyakarika and yogasutras at Loyola Marymount University ( July 28 to August 4), Yogayagnyavalkya a weekend program in Chicago in September and possibly a week long Core vinyasakrama yoga program at Yogakanda, Santiago in Chile in October 2018 (contacto@yogakanda.com). Once the details are confirmed I will have them listed in the Events page of my website.
माया māyā (Illusion)
Disciple: Guruji. I have been hearing that there are a few philosophers who say that the universes is not real but only an illusion.
Guruji: Yes they do
D: How can they say that this universe of bricks and mortar and me made of bones and muscles is an illusion?
G: Are you sure that what you see and feel is real.
D: Most certainly, it is obvious. Can there be any doubt?
G: Those philosophers are sure that the universe is merely an illusion just as you are sure that it is all real.
D: How can this be an illusion? It is real, can't they see that it is all real. Won't they feel the pain if hurt?
G: Just as we see they also see this universe, still they assert that it can only be an illusion. They are reasonable thinkers,truth seekers and sincere people: that is why they are called rishis. Since they also have the same experience as we have but still come to a different conclusion we must spare some time to find out why they say so--try to find what they see that we do not seem to see.
D: What is the Sanskrit word for this illusion we are talking about?
G: There are a few but the most well known one is माया māyā
D; I find that this word is interpreted differently
G: True. It could be different due to the context but it could also depend upon how the word is broken down, analyzed. Usually this samasa (compound word) is split (vigraha) into mA plus yA. Let us restrict the interpretation to the present context which is about the universe. It is "yA mA sA mAya". It is easy to find the meaning of the word 'yA' and it would mean 'the one' in feminine gender.
D: Why feminine gender?
G: It is a peculiarity with Sanskrit . All nouns are masculine, feminine or neuter gender. One reason why the word yA is used is because it is associated with creation.. mother
D: Oh
GL Let us get to the part 'mA' now.
D: 'Yes I see now, 'mA' is mother in many Indian languages and maybe an abbreviation of maatru or mother.
G: Yes one interpretation of the word is mother, here the creatrix or universal mother, She is goddess, sakti one main form of worship, it is one of the six mathas. The word mAyA then would be the one who is the universal mother. MayA, prakriti are used to describle the creative power.
D:Yes we find mAyA a popular name given to girls. Gautama Buddha's mother's name is said to be mAyA. So Maya is the universal sakti or power of creation. But coming to our discussion how does Maya mean illusion?
G: There is another interpretation of the word mA. mA is measure or to measure. In the context of vedanta the created universe is that which is measured or limited or the one that is limited (mA). It should be so understood in the context of vedanta. In vedanta the source of the universe is Brahman which is consciousness unlimited (ananta). In comparison to it the created universe or prakriti is limited. In fact the purusha sukta, a vivid vedic description of creation from the purusha or brahman, the purusha is said to extend beyond the universe by ten digits indicating that the brahman is unlimited and unbounded whereas the created prakriti is limited. There are references to this in a number of vedic and puranic narrations of creation. The created universe is one part or amsa of the Supreme. Even according to scientists the universe in unbounded but limited-it is limited to an immensely dense singularity maybe the size of a dime in its origin. The Samkhyas also appear to suggest the prakriti is atomic in its mula or root stage.
D: So mAyA would represent the mammoth creation but finite. Or mAyA would mean the finite one in the context of the source Brahman which is infinite.
G: Now the other interpretation of 'mA'. It is 'not' or an injunction 'do not' or don't
D: Then it also means who is not, am I right?
G: First let us take the interpretation of 'do not'. Lord Krishna in the Gita tells Arjuna 'mA sochi (sucha) meaning do not worry. MAyA would mean something that one, the spiritual aspirant is advised not to get involved. Why so? Because it is full of duhkha or pain and sorrow or because it repeatedly enslaves one birth after birth with incessant karmas. This is the main theme of samkhya, yoga and vedanta and a few other Eastern philosophies. They all say that the the outside universe is productive of predominantly duhkha, of course sugar quoted with some pleasures which all creatures love and thus captivated and enslaved. Because it is full of duhkha and makes one do karmas both good and bad the consequences of which are repeated duhkha dominated universe in which one takes repeated birhts. So Patanjali says "This repeated misery-- birth after birth-- should be ended (heyam duhkham anagatam)". Fully agree the Samkhyas and vedantins. renunciates, yogis, sanyasins, vivekis bairagis who lead a completely detached life.
D; So you say Maya could indicate that which should be renounced? Yes Maya binds everyone offering some little pleasure for a disproportionate amount of pain and sorrow.
G: Then we have mA meaning 'not' or 'not really existing' whereby we get the interpretation that mAyA is illusion. So mAyA would mean that which does not (really) exist, though it may appear to exist.
D: Who are the scholars that say that the universe is but an illusion or mAyA
G; The most well known of this group are the vednatins who subscribe to the theory of advaita. Other non advaitic vedantins even as they agree that Brahman is the source of everything, that Brahman is 'sat' or real, also imply that the creation also is real, this would be sat vada and satkarya vada. It would mean that the source of the universe Brahman is the reality and then the creation also is a real activity. There are of course a few other non vedic philosophies which imply that the creation is not really real even as they do not subscribe to a real source as Brahman
D: What reasoning these mayavadins put forward to substantiate the assertion that it is all an illusion?
G: Several arguments-- many examples like the rope and snake and others. But one has to reason out step by step.
D: Can we go through the steps you consider helpful?
G: We have done this up to a point in some of our earlier discussions. Ok let us start. First answer the question about how you are able to experience the universe around you. How does science explain this?
D: We experience the outside world through our senses, even though the senses do not directly experience the objects. They are experienced through sight, hearing, taste smell and the touch. According to science these sensations are transmitted by the sense organs like eyes ears etc., to different parts of the brain where they are processed, collated analyzed, compared, emotions added and finally the picture is seen by the brain in the brain. They emphasize that the eyes do not see but only the brain sees.
G. But the universe also consists of you, the subject
D: Some scientists also indicate that there is the awareness of one's own body through the nervous system, the afferent nerves. The impulses sent to the brain by the network of nerves are also felt by the brain. Thus we have a composite picture of what we experience-- the outside world and the subject also as part of the universe. The total experience consists of “I seeing the universe”
G: Ok let us say the brain sees everything. But the brain space is limited but what we see is in front of us, say, like you sitting in front of me outside the brain even as all are within the brain space. Further in the brain the information as processed is in the form of neurons floating around the brain. The whole information may have to be reconverted into some form like what we see.
D I see
G: So the brain after the complete processing in a split second will have to project the whole information exactly as we see, as we experience. And that projection even as it can be assumed to take place in the brain space has to take place in virtual space.
D; Ok like the dream experience taking place in our head during dream state.
G: Now this raises two conclusions. One is that what we see are only the projections of the mind even if we admit that the outside world is real.
D: So the brain receives information as impulses through the senses then projects them in the virtual space. We see only the projection and not the object per say.
G: Yes without the brain recreating what is received through the senses it is not possible to explain how the objects are seen because the brain cells and neurons are not what is seen. The brain itself receives the information through the senses only as electrical impulses.
D: So according to science it amounts to saying that the brain projects the processed information in the virtual/mental space and it also sees what it projects.
G: But then we have a couple of issues with this. One is, if the brain projects what one sees it will amount to saying that since the brain projects also the subject that experiences the outside world, it would imply this.-- that the brain projects itself because the brain is part of the subject. Can the brain project itself and also see that. Then the question the brain the subject has, what is it, is it the organ brain or the projection? It also has another question to answer: can the brain project itself and also see
D: It also raises another question if the brain has got consciousness which is awareness as we experience is not changing, it is unwavering and experiences everything that we experience everything the brain itself is said to process and project.
G: Also the brain is made of matter, just organic matter created from the food matter taken from the outside world. How does the non-conscious matter produce a non changing consciousness. So we could say that that the view held by science that brain is the one that experiences and also is the one which processes and projects the information received through the senses may not be conclusive.
D So what does it mean I am confused
G: It amounts to saying that we do not see the objects of the outside world and can see only the projection a virtual image in virtual space. The view that the brain processes and projects the sensations received and also sees is not really convincing, tenable. So the first conclusion we can make is that one can not ascertain that the outside universe really exists which is the default belief because what we experience can only be virtual. So many philosophers conclude that one cannot prove that the universe exists, and say it is anirvacaniya or indeterminate.
D: Can we say that it is just an illusion? It appears that it is equally difficult to prove that the universe is real.
G: We have to determine two things here. Since we see the universe of which the physical observer the subject also is a part, is just a projection which is all one can say. It is not the result of real objects that are processed and then reprojected as we have just seen. They can only be objectless projections which can be considered or called as an illusion . There is no creation but only a projection.
D: Yes since according to this line of approach, my world that includes me- your disciple -that I perceive is only a projection. And the brain is not the projector of this world I see because since the brain also is a part of the universe it can not project itself.. Further my brain is not the observer. It is funny, that the common belief that the brain experiences and acts itself is an illusion. Looks as though it is difficult to prove that the world is real. In that case from where this world of mine that I experience--even if it is an illusion-- comes and also who is the observer, because the brain can not see, it has no consciousness.
G: Even among those who view that the individual world is but an illusion, an appearance, differ in their answers to your question. According to a well known Indian philosophy very popular in South East Asia, this question is irrelevant. Once you know the whole thing is but an appearance, there is no purpose served in trying to find more answers using the brain. It is known now that it is but an illusion and that it is also full of misery. The only thing one has to do is to overcome this miserable illusion by proper meditation and remove all thoughts the absence of which will remove all pain and sorrow for ever. The search for the self, the observer, subject or whatever is irrelevant, unnecessary or even counterproductive they would advice.
D: It is tough
G: The other view that can be gleaned from the Bhagavat gita is also interesting. Krishna says inter alia, that He or God (Maayin) created the universe by the power of his Maya. Maya now can be considered as real but limited creation as we have considered earlier or it can be considered as an illusion. In fact the Lord is called a Mayavi which expression is usually associated with a magician. This will amount to saying that the Lord created the universe but it is just an illusion not material. Again the subject is the Lord/Brahman Himself which is pure unvarying consciousness who indwells in every body as the atman observing the illusion of each one individually. Ofcourse one should understand the nature of the self, the Lord and the nature of Maya and attain salvation.
D: Are there other views which indicate the universe is not as real as we commonly believe
G; There is another religion/philosophy which implies that God created the universe as succession of momentary impulses. Every moment He creates this universe anew-it is continuous creation-- and the individual creatures are caught up in this mammoth illusion. He is the beacon light to get out of this enslaving creation.
D: Thank you.
G: Think about this line of discussion and understand the texts like the Gita the upanishads and the advaita literature of sankara and others to know more about this mAyA. They all aver that our default understanding of the universe and our own selves are defective.
D: It is not difficult to understand why the mayavadins assert that it is all an illusion or mAyA, but it is yet another to 'feel' that it is so. The sages like Suka, son of Vyasa is believed to have remained completely oblivious to the surroundings and his own body in a state of sahaja samadhi. Gaudapada says to the effect that nobody is ever born really(na kascit jayate jivaha) or anything is ever created really. All creatures are just organic robots activated by their karma/samskaras, like the dream self that runs around with a illusory body and appears to think with a non existing mind. All creatures appear confused about the universe and about themselves life after life.
G: Yes
D: What about Advaita which is associated with Mayavada or the theory of Illusion?
G: It is of the vedantic school. In vedanta the source is Brahman which is unwavering consciousness. This can be immediately identified as the individual consciousness in the subject. In us the body- brain complex, there is consciousness, distinct and uncarying. The vedantins observe that this body/ mind that constantly changes is known due to the consciousness that as we have seen is independent and not part of the brain that is organic matter and is for ever changing. The consciousness in us is ever aware of whatever that goes on as a cittavritti during our childhood then adulthood then old age and according to Lord Krishana into the future lives. It is the same consciousness that is aware of the experiences during waking, dream and deep sleep stages and remains unaffected even in the yogic state of kaivalya or turiya. So all that is experienced is in this atomic brahman whose essence is pure consciousness unaffected by time or space. Everything that is experienced takes place within it ( so is unaffected by space) as a mayavritti or an illusion but appears without it and appears real. That is why in the initial stages one meditates within oneself to locate the atman. So the whole, ever changing experience I have is my world which is an illusion stream is taking place within me within the consciousness Brahman/Atman
D: One more question. Even to experience an illusion one needs eyes and ears, like watching a magic show
G: Not necessarily. Take the case of your dream experience. Dream is an illusion that appears to take place within you. At that time according to science, most motor activities are paralyzed, you forget yourself. Dream experience takes place without the senses coming into play. The dream self sees illusory dream objects with illusory senses and thinks with a brain which is an illusion. Similarly the whole life experience takes place within the Self, the non changing pure consciousness
D: So Brahman the source of my illusory world is the consciousness that should be called as I
G: Yes . Ok be calm, study the texts, think deeply,internalize and clear all doubts.